- Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork3.8k
win,fs: handle AppExecLink reparse points in fstat#4936
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to ourterms of service andprivacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub?Sign in to your account
base:v1.x
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
Conversation
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
vtjnash left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others.Learn more.
I didn't thoroughly review, but everything looks correct at a high level
f84b185 to6c7af79Compare11soda11 commentedNov 21, 2025
There are still fixes to be made, will add soon |
6c7af79 tobe8dab9CompareCurrently, libuv throws EACCES when trying to fstat AppExecLinkreparse points, because Win32's CreateFileW can't resolve them onits own.Use `fs__readlink_handle` as a fallback for reparse pointsthat CreateFileW can't handle. Also change it to accepta preallocated buffer.
be8dab9 to0432441Compare11soda11 commentedNov 22, 2025 • edited
Loading Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
edited
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
Should be fine now, I changed readlink to accept a preallocated buffer (to reduce unnecessary allocations), but i can put that in another pr if that is preferred. |
Currently, libuv throws EACCES when trying to fstat AppExecLink reparse points, because Win32's CreateFileW can't resolve them on its own.
Use
fs__readlink_handleas a fallback for reparse points that CreateFileW can't handle.Fixes this nodejs issue:nodejs/node#36790
This was already attempted (#4663) but the author of that pr stopped working on it.
I believe this is what was intended in#4663 (review) and#4663 (review) but correct me if im wrong.